ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026
Computational investigation of circuit mechanisms underlying short-latency responses to cortical stimulation.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the primary motor cortex (M1) elicits a series of high frequency volleys termed D- and I-waves measured epidurally in the corticospinal tract of awake humans. Further, intracortical microstimulation (ICMS) in M1 of non-human primates evokes D- and I-wave responses similar to those observed in TMS. The cortical circuits and mechanisms involved in the generation of D- and I-waves by stimulation of M1 remain unclear. Here, we implemented computational models of cortical columns with laminarly-organized biophysically-based neurons, following existing models published in the literature: (1) M1 - single compartment (SC), (2) M1 - multi-compartment (MC), (3) primary auditory cortex (A1) - MC, and (4) primary somatosensory cortex (S1) - MC. The network connectivity of each model represented wiring found in the respective cortical regions. The direct effects of stimulation-induced electric fields were modeled as activation of different proportions of pyramidal neurons (PNs) across layers, and dose-response curves were constructed for layer 5 (L5) PNs. Both the M1 and A1 models reproduced D- and I-waves, with the magnitude of I-waves increasing with higher recruitment of layer 2/3 and layer 5 PNs. The S1-MC model evoked rhythmic firing activity but with timings mismatched to experimental I-waves. The models replicated the experimentally observed effects of pharmacological agents on I-waves, and virtual lesions of specific neural populations across models revealed plausible microcircuit explanations for the first and later I-waves. This comprehensive comparison of models across multiple cortical regions identified consistent mechanisms underlying the cortical response to TMS and contributes to the refinement of computational strategies for optimizing stimulation paradigms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.